Creative Ownership

This is just something I had been thinking about in regards to creating something for the public. A lot of people believe that George Lucas no longer 'cares' about the universe he created with Star Wars—that he is now just 'cashing in' on his creation without thought for how it is perceived by others. Every new thing he introduces into the established 'canon' of his setting seems to tick someone off (myself included in some instances). The same has been said about other creative minds—for instance, about George Romero and his zombie movies. Again, here is a case where a director pretty much created a genre and a 'universe' for it to live within. As with Star Wars, people grew up with this setting and come to expect certain things from it. And so when a director returns to it with more ideas, he is bound to alienate fans who have really internalized things.

Even though I am occasionally a disgruntled fanboy, I can really see where as a creator it is a fine line between listening to your fans and listening to your own ideas. In most cases (and especially, it seems, in the case of Lucas and Romero) the creator simply ignores (or has to ignore) the cries of his fans and just do what they want to do. I understand that, even though it frustrates me. It has to be frustrating for the creator as well. You have people clamoring for more and when you give it to them, they are suddenly all over you about how it isn't as they imagined it would be.

The only way around 'fan clamor', it seems, would be to hit the public with a setting all at once, and then duck out, never to revisit. I mean, you didn't really hear people complaining about how the Star Wars universe had changed from Episode IV to Episode VI because it was all NEW at that point—people hadn't had a chance to set their own conceptions in stone yet. But you throw a couple decades of 'living with' the movies and then try something new? Bam. You got problems. The real question, in regards to Star Wars, is whether or not they should have just left it alone and not told the prequels. On a bad day, I'm inclined to say they shouldn't have. But on most days, I can see a lot to enjoy about the prequels, and I'm glad they did it.

So...what does all this mean? Heck if I know. On the one hand, I wish directors like Lucas (and even Romero) would really listen to what their fans are wanting. I would hope that they realize that their creations have gone beyond just being 'their vision'—they've become part of society and part of the lives of the fans themselves. On the other hand, fans are often stupid (myself included) and if listened to could lead a franchise down horrible paths. I mean, if we (as fans) were that smart and creative..why didn't WE come up with Star Wars and do it ourselves?

Gah. It's a dilemma. But it would still be nice if directors at least seemed to take fan opinions (or a consensus thereof) into account, even if it's only a little here or there. Hrm...or maybe not, otherwise Episodes I thru III would have been all about Mandalorians... but wait.. they were, weren't they? I mean.. II and III anyway...

Shades of Grey

While Star Wars is, on the whole, a very black and white setting, I find myself greatly enjoying the introduction of shades of grey into it. It is strange that this should happen right around the time that Mass Effect 2 came out, since that is what I consider one of the great strengths of the game. And yes, this is another ME2 related post, so sue me.

In Mass Effect 2, the moral choices you are presented with are really quite compelling—mainly because for many there is no one 'right' answer. There are very few situations where one decision is clearly 'good' and the other 'evil' (as is the case with so many other games of this sort). You aren't talking of the difference between a heroic paladin and a mustache-twirling villain. For instance...

[SPOILERS]

At one point, you have to decide between either killing millions of a hostile race or essentially brainwashing them to your side. Both choices are questionable morally and I found it an interesting exploration into my own way of thinking. Just how idealistic are my thought processes? In-game and 'in character', I tend to be very idealistic. But taking a step back, I find myself very much 'nagged' by pragmatic solutions to problems—things that may not 'feel' right, but would 'solve the problem'. It is a tribute to the writers of the game that they can make such compelling arguments for BOTH sides of an issue. Indeed, at the climax of the game, I found myself in a very 'real' quandry. The illusive man (played by Martin Sheen) nearly swayed me to his pragmatic cause, even though it felt wrong morally. I am very interested to see how this decision will impact the next game. In the end, it did come down to idealism on my part. As Commander Sheperd put it: "We're going to win this war. And we're not going to do it at the expense of my race's soul." (or something to that effect). While it feels good to support that kind of idealism in a game, it really gets me thinking what I'd do in 'real life' if faced with such moral choices. Would love to think I'd be as noble, but...you never know.

But what does this have to do with Star Wars? Well, I'll tell you! The whole idea of a 'pragmatic' secret society trying to save the Galaxy "whatever the cost" is now central to my current campaign. And believe it or not, I came up with the idea BEFORE ME2 came out! No, really, I did! Corewatch (the name of the shadowy figure in charge of this secret society) presented my PCs with a very similar 'grey' choice. With the superweapons he has at his disposal, he stands a real chance of making an impact in the war against the Nagai. And yet, such practices are VERY questionable morally. I was glad to see my players react thoughtfully, even if they DID ultimately go with the 'good' choice and condemning the use of bio-warfare and other things. Honestly, I wasn't entirely sure how they'd react. I mean, there was some compelling evidence on Corewatch's side...but in the end, they went with what 'feels right', rather than what the 'numbers support'.

This kind of grey area isn't something I like to inject into Star Wars ALL the time—because as I've said many times before, Star Wars is NOT a 'gritty' setting. I like the start contrasts of good and evil on the whole, but it's fun to switch things up from time to time.

The Future of Star Wars

In my talking about 'Controlling the Universe'—and in my own divergence from canon, I have lately been considering what MY Star Wars galaxy is gong to look like in its future. I have already decided that I will not be 'rehashing' all the cliches of the setting again. I do not see the Republic falling after 40 years and chaos reigning thereafter. Rather, I see the start of another 'Golden Age' of the Republic, a rebuilding of all that has been lost during the war and a return to consolidation, expansion and exploration.

This, of course, goes directly against established canon. And more so, it seems to go against the central theme of the setting Star WARS. Without a 'War'...is it really still the same game? Well, my answer to this is—there will always be wars. But in the future I see, they would be limited in scope. There would still be friction with the Empire and the Sith. Various corporate and independent powers could still cause trouble.

But honestly, I am getting a little sick of the constant titanic-scale combat being waged through the galaxy. First the movie trilogies, then the Ssi'Ruuk invasion (Aliens from the boonies), then the Thrawn invasion (Imperial remnants), then the Dark Empire invasion (Imperial Remnants), then the Yevethan Invasion (Aliens from the boonies), then the Vong invasion (more Aliens from the boonies), then the Swarm War (more aliens from the boonies) then another Republic civil war, then a Sith invasion... gah. By that time, the economy of the galaxy, not to mention it's infrastructure, should be shot to hell. And also, as you can see from the above, things start to get repetitive.

So, what is the answer for me and my own campaign? How can I have a 'Golden Age', while still maintaining a 'Star Wars' setting. The lower-scale conflict thing mentioned above is a good start. This ensures there is still danger and intrigue going on, even if folks aren't out blowing up entire planets. Spy and diplomatic work will be paramount—establishing and maintaining peace across an entire galaxy will be very tricky indeed. Threats can still be of a very high-level, but the 'war' against them will largely be waged in shadow. This is especially true of such threats as the Sith—who will be a constant menace to the Republic and its Jedi guardians.

I also see the emphasis of the setting going from war to exploration—opening up all sorts of opportunities for people to face unknown challenges. I would hesitate to swing too far into the 'Star Trek' aspect of something like this—because the genres are VERY distinct from eachother. But in all honesty, an Exploration campaign in Star Wars is very workable—just look at the Darkstryder campaign. The idea behind it is largely exploration (even if they did gum up the works a bit by forcing a specific plot-line).

It was this exploration aspect that really got me thinking. In my game, it has been established that there /IS/ intergalactic travel. My main villain race, the Nagai, are from another galaxy, having crossed over from their own to conquer the Republic. The Republic itself has experimental trans-galactic technology as well—in the form of a 'Star Gate' (though at the time of writing this, they have only just been testing it). If you throw this into the mix, then you could easily expand the scope of Star Wars by opening up a new 'frontier' in a new Galaxy. Imagine exploration teams in this new place, encountering new races and governments—and threats. There are all kinds of political ramifications of this, especially if there were some new 'bad guy' organization in this new place. Does the Republic stand by and let peace-loving races be overrun? Does it ally itself and risk (another) intergalactic war?

Well, it is Star WARS, so, yes, I imagine that would happen. And this time, it would be DIFFERENT from rehashing the same old stuff. From a GM viewpoint, its like having my cake and eating it too. I mean, on the one hand, I have a relatively stable Galactic Republic, able to exist, grow and heal the wounds of decades of war and turmoil. But on the other, I have a 'brand new Galaxy' that may very well be on the verge of its own titanic scale war. New enemies, new power structures, new dynamics. Plenty of room for small groups of explorer/soldiers to make a big impact and become heroes on a Galactic Scale. And all in a way that doesn't follow the tired thread of '...another alien race invades' or 'the empire/sith rise...again'.

What could some of the powers in this New Galaxy look like?

Well, why not new Force User traditions—completely unaffected by the Jedi/Sith thing.

Imperial Renegades? Maybe a rogue Imperial faction/fleet tries to carve out a corner of this new galaxy for itself—providing some familiar faces, but in unexpected places.

The Vong? I hated the novels, but I loved the concept of the race. What's to stop them from being the 'big baddies' of THIS Galaxy?

A gagillion new Alien species and governments. I picture a much less unified Galaxy, with lots of smaller 'empires' (and races), rather than one galaxy-spanning organization.

Corporate Exploiters. Big corps from the Star Wars Galaxy trying to exploit new markets—often at the expense of safety and ethics.

These are just a few things off the top of my head, but I know I could easily add to this list. The prospect of it excites me. In fact, on the way back from South Dakota, Steve2 and I talked a lot about this—and even the prospect of starting a 'new' campaign—playing the sons and daughters (or other 'descendants') of the original Vermillion campaign characters. Just push the timeline ahead 20 years or so and there you are.

Of course, this wouldn't come at the expense of the 'old' campaign. Nobody is ready to give that up, I don't think. I'm certainly not. But I think it would be a fun and interesting addition to the story we've created thus far. I had meant to email the guys with this first, but hell, I'll post it here and email them later and see what they think about a 'new campaign'...and about the idea in general.

Happy Chancellor's Day!

I am going to celebrate my nation's great leaders by...working! But in the meanwhile, enjoy the photo of the coolest head of state ever—Chancellor Leia Organa-Solo of the New Republic. Statesperson. Soldier. Patriot. Idealist. Mother. Jedi. Gold-bikini-wearer.

Mass Effect 2

[SOME MINOR SPOILERS]

This has nothing to do with Star Wars, but I can't help but gush. I love Mass Effect 2. For me it is about a perfect mix between computer role play and first-person shooting. I happen to love both. BioWare has once again blown me away with the level of detail and the quality of acting and writing. As many reviewers have said, the overall story line (uniting the galaxy to fight a mysterious, overpowering alien threat) is something we've seen before. But the quality of the production and the strength of the supporting characters is such that it sets it far apart from other titles in the genre. I couldn't agree more.

Never before in a game have I felt as keenly 'absorbed' as I have in this one. The fact that you can actually lose members of your team in action gave the whole thing a very dramatic and unsettling feel. For instance, when you first meet one of your buddies from the first game (Garrus), he gets badly shot up. I remember having this sick feeling in the pit of my stomach. I didn't know if he was going to 'die' or not—and I found myself very emotionally involved, hoping he'd pull through. The relationships you can form with the rest of your team throughout the game likewise make the possibility of their demise a real punch in the gut—especially during the final act, where everyone is in very 'real' danger of dying. Sure, there are some characters I identify with more than others, but the fact that each has such depth really makes the thought of losing them a painful one.

In short (too late), this game does what all good action (and even horror) movies should do—it gives you time and a reason to care about the various characters, thus making the danger they face a more palpable and meaningful thing. Through the entire climax of the game, I was quite literally on the edge of my seat—and that's not a common thing, even with RPG games, where you usually know the 'mechanics' behind each encounter.

In the above paragraph, you'll note I used the term 'movies'. That was no error, because even more than it's predecessor, Mass Effect 2 plays like a movie. And I don't just mean the cut-scenes. I mean the various missions, the decisions you make, the twists and turns in story and relationships—they are all very cinematic in nature. Unlike many so-called RPGs, this game lets you PLAY the character rather than just watch cut scenes where he (or she) does cool things. And that is a huge distinction for me.

Many of the criticisms I've seen leveled at the game kind of amuse me—and frustrate me. There were a lot of complaints about Mass Effect 1. In ME2, they seemed to address most of them. And now people are complaining about how they fixed them. Man, you really cannot please everyone. On the one side, you have people who want a more 'pure role playing' game—who hate the real-time combat. Some of these also mourn the loss of huge inventory lists and being able to (or forced to) cycle through lists of equipment and upgrades in order to equip your guys and gals with the next best thing. On the other, you have shooter fanatics complaining about the lack of differentiation in firearms and the 'over abundance' of dialogue. And I guess those are really at the heart of the matter—when you try to fit two disparate play-models into one game you risk alienating people at either end of the spectrum. Thankfully, I enjoy both, so I'm in the happy middle-ground between the two.

Honestly? I do enjoy tinkering with party inventory and even a longer list of skills, but neither of those things were ever central to my enjoyment of a game. In fact, there were times in ME1 where the inventory tinkering actually got in the way, breaking up the flow of the game in some very dramatic moments (YOUR INVENTORY IS FULL! isn't a fun thing to get in the middle of a firefight). About the only criticism that I've head that I agree with is the boredom of scanning planets for minerals. It isn't a very large step up from driving around in a truck hunting for them. But does that get in the way of me enjoying the game? Hell no. So QUIT WHINING people. Geez.

But beyond game-play mechanics, and even acting and story, there is an attention to detail in the game that is just amazing. And we're talking 'blink and you'll miss it' type things. I don't know if most people even care about them, but the fact they're there shows a deep level of commitment by the makers of the game and add a depth that I personally enjoy a lot. There are emails you receive through the adventure—some from people you encountered in ME1. They have no big effect on your current mission, but they're fun to read. There is the picture of your 'significant other' (whoever you may have romanced in ME1) sitting on the desk in your cabin. And later, if you choose to pursue a romance with someone else, you return to find your SO's picture is now face down on the desk. Nothing big, but it's there nonetheless. And it's cool.

Oh, and then there's the humor. Holy crap this game is funny. From your pilot's interactions with the crew and onboard AI to some of the comments and 'in-jokes' your team-mates make. I have laughed out loud many times during play. But then again, this goes hand in hand with great writing and acting. Most dramatic situations, especially serious and horrific ones, need comedy—both to lighten the mood and to contrast with the bleakness and danger of the story—thus sharpening it.

I could gush all day about this game, and indeed about BioWare, but I'll cut it short (too late), since it really isn't a Star Wars post. I have been won over by this company and the high quality of the games they put out. Knights of the Old Republic. Jade Empire. Dragon Age: Origins. Mass Effect and now Mass Effect 2. It is rare for me to put a lot of trust into a company, but BioWare pretty much has it at this point. Lets just hope the creative minds at BioWare continue to win out over the suits and number crunchers. Because in the end, creativity is what sets BioWare apart, not flashy marketing or cookie-cutter re-hashes of the same thing.

P.S. For all those folks out there who have complained about BioWare games being 'predictable', I say 'Phooey'. Yes, there is a distinct 'formula' that seems to go along with BioWare games, and an expectation of some kind of 'plot-twist' in the last third of the game. But expecting a twist and KNOWING what the twist is going to be are two different things. So far, they've really done a great job of switching it up from game to game. They're never going to have the same impact as the 'Revelation' in Knights of the Old Republic, but they're enjoyable nontheless. So.. phooey on you, haters.

P.P.S. And another things...I just love folks who go onto forums for games like ME2 and speak with such authority on things they really have no idea about. People who speak in absolutes about situations or decisions on which they have no basis other than their own opinion. To you folks I say *flapping hand open and closed* Shut your WHORE mouth!

The Basilisk War Droid—Mk II

I've spoken about the Basilisk before—my likes and dislikes of it. Here now are the final 'stats' of the Basilisks that I am using in my current game. Note: They are a very odd conglomeration of vehicle, droid and mount, meaning they have some odd, overlapping stats.

In actual use, the Basilisk has proven formidable, but surprisingly not out of balance. It is essentially a light-tank with its own built in 'crew'. It's versatility is probably it's greatest asset, able to maneuver on land, in the air, and even in space. Though able to dish out and absorb a great deal of damage with infantry units, anti-vehicle weaponry can quickly disable a basilisk. Linked in to it's rider's helm-computer, control of various systems can easily transfer between rider and the droid brain itself—allowing either to control the piloting/operation of the droid body and its various systems (sensors, weapons, etc.)

While originally provided with a very simplistic personality, the Mandalorians have (at the request of their leader) upgraded this by adding on to the basic systems. This has resulted in some very odd quirks coming to the forefront. Chief among these is a 'willfull' and 'arrogant' personality that can make repairing the droids something of a chore. It also requires that riders win the 'respect' of their Basilisks before they can operate at peak efficiency together.

TYPE: Mandalorian Basilisk Mk II War Droid

SCALE: Character

LENGTH: 4 m (Not including tail)

CREW: 1

PASS.: 1

COVER: 3/4

CARGO: 10kg

CONS.: 1 Week

MANEUVER: 0D

SPEED: 4 (Space); 200 kph (Air); 90 kph (Ground/Water)

ALTITUDE: Ground Level—1km; Capable of Atmospheric Re-entry

HULL: 7D (+2D) Armor (Character Scale)

SENSORS:

Passive: 10 (0D)

Scan: 20 (1D)

Search: 40 (2D)

Focus: 2 (3D)

WEAPONRY:

Vibro-Claws/Teeth

Arc: Forward

Scale: Character

Dmg: 9D (Energy, Claws)/7D (Energy, Teeth)

Tail

Arc: Rear

Scale: Character

Dmg: 7D (Physical)

Spec: Entangle Attack

Auto-Blaster (Mouth-Mounted)

Arc: Forward, Sides

Scale: Character

Range: 60/120/360m

Dmg: 8D

Spec: Capable of Burst and Autofire

Breaching-Torch (Mouth Mounted)

Arc: Forward

Scale: Vehicle

Range: 2m

Dmg: 6D

Special: Capable of cutting controlled hull breaches

Missile-Pods (Shoulder-Mounted-Disposable)

Arc: Forward

Scale: Vehicle

Range:

Dmg: 7D

Ammo: 4 (2-Per Launcher)

ATTRIBUTES:

Strength 7D (+2D Armor for Damage Resistance)

Dexterity 2D

Agility 3D

Intelligence 1D

Perception 3D

Charisma 1D

SKILLS:

Dodge 5D

Melee* 8D (Usage of built-in Brawl/Melee systems)

Piloting* 5D (Covers only flying 'itself')

Gunnery* 6D (Usage of built-in Ranged weapon systems)

Climbing 6D

Jumping 6D

Running 5D

Stamina 8D

Stealth 4D (Maximum for this skill due to size)

Zero-Gee 3D (Movement in space w/o Thrusters)

Armor-Tech 3D (Diagnostic only, unable to self-repair)

Blaster-Tech 3D (Diagnostic only, unable to self-repair)

Droid-Tech 3D (Diagnostic only, unable to self-repair)

Survival 3D

Comm. 3D (Utilizing built-in comm-systems)

Sensors 3D (Utilizing built-in sensor-systems)

Observation 3D

Search 5D

Tracking 4D

Controlling the Universe

In my many years of gaming within an established setting like Star Wars, I've come to a few realizations about my preferences in RPGs in general. Keep in mind that in this post, though I speak in 'absolutes', I am really only speaking for myself and my own tastes. Now, central of these realizations is that there should be a time where the GM takes control of a setting and truly makes it his own. In settings where there are constant outside developments (like the Star Wars Expanded Universe for example), this is going to require some kind of mental editing. With the slew of 'backstory' that keeps filling in the Star Wars saga, many things you have come to accept are suddenly turned on their ear—and sometimes not in a way you particularly enjoy. In fact, some revelations may completely overturn the decisions you made early on. You can respond to this change in one of two ways: alter your universe every time some new novel is written or pick and choose which new things become part of your universe—and decide HOW they become a part.

The problem, as I see it, stems from a Trend in gaming that began in the mid-eighties in TSR. For the first time, you began to have series of novels set within the gaming worlds they created. Dragonlance and the Forgotten Realms are prime examples of this. You not only have sourcebooks coming out to describe the world, but you then have major characters and plotlines written within those worlds. This is all fine and dandy—to a point. I mean, I loved the Dragonlance novels, and I would STILL love to run a campaign set during that story (with parallel heroes, rather than the 'main characters' of the novels). But for me, there would come a time where I would have to stop letting the authors dictate the course of the world, otherwise, my players would be doomed to obscurity and impotence as they weave around the major plot lines, but have you real way to affect them. In short, I feel that if you follow the course of a bunch of novels, you are turning your PCs into a 'supporting cast'. For some? That may be what they prefer. I do not.

The Battletech setting is another prime example of Novels dictating the game. When Battletech was first released, it did an AWESOME job of providing an incredibly in depth background to its setting—giving you a snapshot of people, places and happenings at one particular time (in this case, the year 3025, on the brink of what could be the 'final' war to reunify the 'Star League'). This left all KINDS of options for what to do from this point. And then....novels happened. And a sourcebook happened, jumping the setting ahead 25 years and describing, in some detail, that 'final' war and its effects on the setting. And even before all this could settle in, a new series of novels and sourcebooks introducing MORE sweeping changes as the 'Clans' invaded the known galaxy. It was really at this point that I first attempted running a game within the setting. We began shortly before the Clan invasion and played for a bit into it. It was fun. But more novels and more sourcebooks kept coming out. And in them, so MANY details were provided that it would make it next to impossible to run a major battle or campaign, because it would be completely stepped on by the official 'canon' of the setting.

The 'end game' of a campaign for me is what is currently going on in my Vermillion Star Wars setting. With the players operating as major leaders and heroes on a galactic scale—nearly on the same level as the heroes of the movies. This gives their actions a LOT of weight and impact on the world around them. Now, I realize that not all campaigns will go on for 19 years, and that most never even get close to an 'end game', but it is always nice to have that option.

When the Star Wars RPG came out in 1987, it was already 4 years 'after the fact', as far as the movies were concerned. And there were VERY few novels or even comics expanding upon that setting. Thus, when my campaign began in 1991, I had a pretty well established setting, but one where I knew the major events and could work around them—and add to them—without fear of breaking 'canon'. Coincidentally, right about the time my campaign was moving past the movie storyline, the series of Zahn novels (Heir to the Empire) came out, detailing events five years after Return of the Jedi. With some discussion with my players, we decided to jump our own campaign ahead those five years and play within THOSE events. Again, with all three novels out by the time we did that, we could easily weave our own stories in with those presented.

It was after Heir that the REAL slew of novels and comics began. I stuck with it through some of them (Dark Empire, Jedi Academy), but I very quickly found it to be frustrating, constantly scrambling in response to what someone ELSE wrote—and often to things that I felt were down-right stupid and poorly written. How could the players ever be free to really 'do things' if I as a GM was not in control of my own setting. That's when I made the conscious decision to break things off right at that point and forge my OWN story—largely based upon the actions of my players, and on my own views of what the SW universe 'should' be. And honestly? I can't think of another way to run a game. Reading novels/comics is one thing. Gaming is another. The former are GREAT as a source of information, but should never be allowed to overshadow the latter. After all, the point of games like Star Wars is to be a hero, not an 'extra' in someone else's story and universe. So my advice to other GMs is, take what you can from a setting—then make it your own.